Early Real-World Experience of Tofacitinib for Psoriatic Arthritis: Data from a United States Healthcare Claims Database
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This study characterized real-world demographic and baseline clinical characteristics, as well as treatment persistence and adherence, in patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) who had newly initiated tofacitinib treatment. This retrospective cohort study included patients aged 18 years or older in the IBM MarketScan™ US database with at least one tofacitinib claim (first = index) between December 14, 2017 and April 30, 2019; PsA diagnoses on/within 12 months pre-index; and no diagnoses of rheumatoid arthritis any time pre-index. Patients were continuously enrolled for 12 months pre-index and 6 months post-index, with no pre-index claims for tofacitinib. Patient demographic and clinical characteristics on the day of index, and history of advanced treatments (including tofacitinib monotherapy or combination therapy), were recorded. Outcomes at 6 months post-index included tofacitinib persistence (less than 60-day gap without tofacitinib treatment) and adherence (proportion of days covered [PDC] and medication possession ratio 80% or higher). Of the 10,354 patients with tofacitinib claims within the study period, 318 patients with PsA met the inclusion criteria. More than 60% of patients received tofacitinib monotherapy post-index, with a mean duration of PsA of 760.5 days at index. For patients who received tofacitinib combination therapy post-index, methotrexate was the most common concomitant conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug. At 6 months post-index, persistence was similar in patients receiving tofacitinib monotherapy (69.8%) versus combination therapy (73.1%); adherence (as measured by PDC ≥ 0.8) was numerically lower in patients receiving tofacitinib monotherapy (56.8%) versus combination therapy (65.5%). This analysis of US-based claims data described patients who had newly initiated tofacitinib treatment an average of 2 years after PsA diagnosis, with approximately two-thirds of patients receiving tofacitinib monotherapy. Observed rates of tofacitinib persistence were similar across patients who received tofacitinib monotherapy and combination therapy 6 months after initiation; adherence rates were numerically lower in patients receiving monotherapy. Tofacitinib is a drug approved to treat patients with psoriatic arthritis (PsA) that has been shown to improve PsA symptoms and quality of life in controlled clinical trials. However, there is not much information on everyday use of tofacitinib outside of clinical trials in the USA. This study is one of the first to describe the characteristics of patients with PsA in the USA who take tofacitinib, including their typical age, sex, where they live, how long they have had PsA, and how they use tofacitinib. Use of tofacitinib included how patients followed tofacitinib prescription timings and dose (adherence) and how long they took tofacitinib for after it was prescribed (persistence). We used data collected from a US health insurance claims database (IBM MarketScan™) for patients with PsA and at least one claim for tofacitinib. In total, 318 patients were included and over 60% of them received tofacitinib therapy only (monotherapy; no conventional synthetic disease-modifying antirheumatic drug [csDMARD] therapy). For patients treated with both tofacitinib and a csDMARD (combination therapy), methotrexate was the most common drug prescribed. Six months after their first prescription of tofacitinib, around 70% of patients were still taking tofacitinib (monotherapy or combination therapy). However, a slightly lower number of patients taking tofacitinib monotherapy were taking it as originally instructed (adherence 57%), compared with those taking tofacitinib combination therapy (adherence 66%). Our results provide valuable information on the use of tofacitinib in US real-life settings outside of clinical trials and could help to improve the quality of care for patients with PsA.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,010 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».